YouTuber Leaves Smosh Games After Sexual Harassment Allegations

YouTuber Leaves Smosh Games After Sexual Harassment Allegations

Amra “Flitz” Ricketts, a popular YouTube star and member of the massive network Smosh Games, has left the organisation after being accused by multiple women of sexual assault.

“I wanted to let all of you know that effective immediately, I’m leaving Smosh Games,” Ricketts wrote on Twitter yesterday. “Last week I was accused of some of the worst things imaginable by a group of old friends and former roommate. While I deny all allegations against me, this community, my family at Smosh Games, and the team behind it mean so much to me. I cannot risk this having a negative impact on them.”

Ricketts added that he is “working with a lawyer to disprove all false claims.”

Smosh Games is the gaming channel of the popular YouTube sketch group, Smosh, and has a huge fanbase on its own, with over seven million subscribers on YouTube. Ricketts has regularly contributed to the channel since 2014.

Ricketts’ resignation comes several days after a series of accusations against him, starting December 31, 2017, when performer Raquey Strange (who prefers to go by non-binary pronouns) wrote on Facebook that Ricketts had sexually assaulted them.

In a lengthy story about living with Ricketts in what they called “a cult environment,” Strange accused the YouTube personality of inviting Strange to his apartment for what Strange thought was a hangout but was actually a group sex encounter. “I started feeling really uneasy when he came up to me and fondled me,” Strange wrote. “I was upset and confronted him about consent. His reaction was that of, ‘oh fuck that. Don’t pull that shit on me. That’s not how this works. Not with me.'”

“As the sex began I didn’t know what to do,” Strange added. “At first I just lay there while four people were having sex around me until I started being touched and feeling as though I HAD to participate. I was completely coerced into the orgy.”

Several other Facebook users responded in the comments of Strange’s post with what they say are their own stories about Ricketts. “It is no secret that I used to consider Amra my best friend from 2013-2015,” wrote a commenter named Alyssa Paige Woodard. “The events described I’ve either been a witness to, or are things Raquey and others have shared with me in the past.”

“Thank you for coming forward,” wrote YouTuber April “AprilEff” Fletcher. “I have been waiting for my chance to publicly support someone coming out against him as I have had proof of him raping women since April of 2016.”

Fletcher added on Twitter that three other women had told her about being assaulted by Ricketts in 2016, when Fletcher accused YouTuber Toby Turner of assaulting her during their past relationship. (Turner denied those allegations.)

Another YouTuber and streamer, Jessa Day, also spoke out about Ricketts, writing on Facebook in response to Raquey Strange’s post that, “I think a lot of you knew that Amra use[d] to be one of my best friends. I don’t really wanna talk about my experience just yet, but yeah, the shit is true.”

Ricketts did not respond to a request for comment.


  • I think the article headline needs to be modified. They’re not ‘harassment’ allegations. It’s all straight-up assault by what seems like yet another Entitled Internet Douchebag (EID?). Using the word ‘harassment’ diminishes what he’s alleged to have done to people and the impact on them.

      • Definitely allegations but not harrassment. ‘Alleged sexual assault’ works fine. If someone is accused of murder, we don’t use the term ‘alleged physical altercation’.

  • “…as I have had proof of him raping women since April of 2016.”
    And did nothing.

    “Fletcher added on Twitter that three other women had told her about being assaulted by Ricketts in 2016,”
    Also, is not proof but just more allegations. Sure, you could say that the more people come forward then it could insinuate actual misbehaviour and that it’s recurring, but it’s still not proof and you’re going into dangerous “majority rules mob victory” territory.

    “… I cannot risk this having a negative impact on them.”
    Surely the company you’ve worked for, the people you’ve worked with, would all stand beside you and want the best for you if you were innocent. It’s not like he’s suddenly distanced from the company, they’re just now not really required to be within the drama unless someone else’s involved, his actions imply a more sort of “shit’s gone down but it hasn’t got anything to do with these guys”.

    “… I don’t really wanna talk about my experience just yet, but yeah, the shit is true.”
    I can’t say anything, but it does happen, please believe me, please believe me.

    Like, don’t get me wrong, not taking sides, but I’d rather the world be rid of this stupid emotional bullshit that’s taken the place of educated and deductive reasoning. Use your damn heads.

    Also with the girl who was invited to the orgy, could she not leave? Like, not justifying the actions of others but one, if people are unaware of your unwillingness to participate then you can’t blame them for continuation of actions and two, there has to be some expectation on you to act to put yourself into a better situation. There’s no sympathy for a fool who sits in a fire and gets burned.

    • That’s a little bit harsh. She may have felt pressured into the encounter. Raises questions of consent though if consent appeared implied by her participation (and raises the frightening question of retrospectively revoked consent).

      That said, you’re right that these are only allegations – right at this point, both the allegations of assault and the refutation are equally valid. If he’s a rapist it’s time to get the law involved rather than simply throwing around allegations on social media where the burden of “proof” is nil.

      • I’m under the impression the reason people go to social media instead of law enforcement is because you need proof to actually charge someone where as social media you can kill their career and reputation with the “listen and believe” mentality.

        • Probably – but they may still be factual allegations. You’re right that we just don’t know for sure.

          The problem with “listen and believe” is that it’s now “listen and assume guilt”. The point of listen and believe is to listen to the allegation and accept that it may be true. Instead people demand that we accept it as the truth by default, and presume guilt until innocence can be definitively and unquestionably proven.

          The social burden and standard of proof is stacked against the alleged offender such that no social media defence is possible.

          • Thank you so much for spitting out exactly what is wrong with the way the “Listen and Believe” has been twisted so much these days.

            Any investigator or officer of the law has to abide by “Listen and Believe” but not in the way that everyone online seems to have translated it to be – in that do not assume the accuser is lying and that the statement may be true and to try and investigate claim to verify its truth via evidence. Not the commonly expected assume the statement is truth and proof of guilt

            It was put in place so that an officer is duty bound to treat everyone equally under the law and that claims cannot be summarily dismissed until proper evidence has been gathered. It’s not supposed to be a bypass to admission for guilt but a way to make sure that any accusations of guilt are treated seriously and equally to make sure that it’s either verified with evidence to punish the guilty OR to exonerate an innocent individual from undue punishment.

            Everyone seems to be happy with the first part and just skip the all too important second part of burden of proof. =/

        • Still with this, you just don’t give up do you? Will someone please think of the sexual abusers!

          • And… just what if… the person didn’t do it?

            What if say, someone is accused by this method falsely by someone who has a personal axe to grind against them? Are you actually ready to weigh up both sides of possibility?

          • But, good sir, the court of public opinion has already deemed him guilty. There’s no need for physical evidence beyond someone saying he did it!

  • These allegations are already out of hand. We need to stop just accepting these allegations without proof and start putting pressure on people to follow the proper procedure by going to law enforcrment. Let them investigate the matters and put it before court if there is a case. All this social media hazing is doing is ruining people’s careers and reputations without proof.

    How many of these allegations have turned out true? How many have found to be false yet have still ruined people? These are the issues that should be investigated and reported on.

    • Do you even know the answers to your own questions? No, you are speculating as well and accepting your own clearly biased speculation as the standard. According to you, for each true rape apparently there are hundreds of these poor men having their reputations ruined by these lying vixens. Certainly it cannot be that most of the allegations are real, right?

      • The point here is that we are not the law. And as you said so yourself we all come with preconceived biases. Every time this sort of outing by social media happens it becomes a trial by media so to speak, lines are drawn and people are frothing at the teeth to declare guilty or going mad trying to take the defensive.

        Sure these allegations may be correct. But at the same time it’s not as if some allegations have also been proven false before have they? That’s why we have whats supposed to be an impartial court of law to try and minimise such miscarriages of justice and make sure the proper guilty person is made to face punishment.

        This is not a matter of all rape claims are false or all rape claims are true. That’s a false dichotomy commonly used here to shut down any form of questioning by attacking the question and not the event. The point is these are just claims and have equal chances of being either true OR false depending on the evidence. Sure the initial evidence of a multitude of people stepping out means that it is very likely to be true BUT that’s not our place to call judgement until ALL evidence is at the table and examined and judged by an impartial party. If he is guilty then by all means the scum deserves everything coming at him but if he was proven innocent then what happens? You cannot take back whats been taken from said person. A person falsely thrown in jail and revealed to be innocent will never get that part of their life back in much the same way a person who’s life has been ruined will always have that stigma of accusation looming forever.

        Every time a person jumps to conclusions on such accusations it is not helping anyone. It feeds into the false dichotomy arguments and that just further entrenches people on their own personal biases instead of actually getting to the root of the problem – was the accusation true or false?

        • I actually agree with you on most things. My comment was what it was because that poster was assuming that /most/ rape accusations were fake which is a terrible thing to believe.

      • We don’t know how many of these social media accusations are factual because not all of them end up being brought to police for possible prosecution. Right now, it’s entirely accusations and hearsay.

        • My point is that we actually don’t know that. We get the media noise, but not so much about the legal proceedings in the background. The poster I responded to was using that fact to conclude that /most/ accusations are fake.

          • Don’t recall saying that, I said the allegations are getting out of hand. We see a new one every couple of days it feels like. Investigative journalists should look into how many of these public allegations ever went to law enforcement agencies and how many prosecutions were successful instead of just spreading the allegations and then not following up if it turns out the allegation was false.

            I’m all for justice being served, but that includes all people, even shitty people who are innocent. Let the proper authorities work this out instead of jumping on the social media lynch mobs.

          • Okay, so please clarify this: if you are not implying that most accusations are fake, how are the allegations getting “out of hand”? By denying that you are saying that, you’re saying that yes, most accusations are true. So, what’s so scandalous about “a new one every couple of days!!!!!!”? Although you admit that the accusations may be true, you seem to be suggesting that these women should pace themselves with them? What should the correct pace be, then? Two a week? a month? And should we limit these per outlet, or the whole Internet? If a woman makes a tweet that she was raped, should Twitter moderators tell her “tut-tut, there was a woman claiming to be raped just two days ago on Facebook, kindly wait your turn”?

            You make it sound as though it’s all the work of these rogue detective-wannabe journalists (although, I am going to note here that they DO make things worse at times) as opposed to it being simply that women, out of their own volition and emboldened by the fact that other women are finally daring to speak up, are reporting rapists at this rate.

            I do understand what you are saying about the necessity of a system, but you tell me. How good this system worked for women through the centuries? What evidence can you offer of an assault perpetrated on you back when you were a scared and witless teenager? Don’t you know that rape is invariably accompanied by terrible threats of the things that could happen should they speak up? Or haven’t you noticed how many of these are men of great power and/or wealth, capable not only of following on their threats but also easily overcoming, buying or ignoring your precious “authorities”? Did you see the case of Roy Moore? Even though /several/ women have come forward to offer detailed testimonies, they were still laughed at by people interested in his political career (and it seems that one of them was made a victim of arson). You tell me, what would have happened if these women quietly, and individually just made a report to the police? I mean, like women have been doing for decades and yet, every study made finds that an overwhelming percentage of rapists are at large.

            I’ll agree with you that the roman circus we have now is not ideal either, and ripe for abuse. But it is a necessary (if painful) transition into a better system. One where women do not fear to speak up, where rapists are aware that getting away with it is going to be increasingly more difficult, and where due process follows swiftly and efficiently.

          • You’re reading too much into my comments. I’m not saying the things you think I am and it appears I can’t better articulate it for you to understand so sorry but I’ll leave as that.

          • You are right. After the unmentioned edit to your original post, now my responses sound like those of a rambling lunatic.

          • I’m sorry mate but I haven’t edited anything. If I had the comment would have “was edited” down the bottom I’m sure. Perhaps you just read my comment again and realised you may have misinterpreted it originally which is fine, we all make mistakes.

          • Yes, I am wrong. The thing that I was quoting and couldn’t find again in your original post was actually in another post of yours. Apologies for that. Should teach me to comment first thing in the morning.

          • The poster never said that at all, you’re making that up or at least drawing a long bow to conclude that. All that Simocrates said was that we should not be condemning people without some sort of proof.

          • That’s what he said yes. I was referring to what he was implying. He said that the accusations were “getting out of hand”, like “a new one every couple days”. So if most accusations are not fake but true… what’s the problem with they being reported so often?

            As for condemning people, I’ll agree about a proper investigation needing to follow through for real-world consequences. But as for “we”? That seems more like a personal thing, wouldn’t you agree? As an example, for me, a dozen of separate, unconnected women accusing Roy Moore of abusing them when they were teenagers constitutes enough “proof” for me to personally “condemn” this man and do whatever little I can (i.e. a vote against, if I lived there) to stop him from gaining even more power. I dunno if that constitutes enough proof to you or whether you’ll save your personal condemnation for after seeing the results of 3 or whatever years of investigation and legal proceedings involving the kind of sleazy defense attorneys that the very rich and powerful can afford. I feel as though we are free to personally condemn others the way it feels right for us.

          • The problem with referring to what you believe someone is implying, is at the end of the day it’s what you assume he’s implying. Work on facts, not emotion, never assume.

          • That’s a nice platitude, but let’s be practical. If someone says that things are getting “out of hand” with “a new one every couple of days”, (which sounded like a very emotional assessment, don’t you think?)… what are the facts? There are none, it’s clearly an opinion, so we are left to interpret (what you call ‘assuming’). So, it reads to me as though the poster is complaining about the frequency of the reports and since I don’t want to assume that the poster is evil and believes that true rape reports should be slowed down or silenced, I imagined that he justifies it somehow, i.e. too many fake reports.

            If you have a different interpretation of that sentence, I’d love to hear it and a conversation can be started, but so far you are just telling me not to assume things.

            Ninja-edit: I now notice that the original poster has updated the wording of his post which, if he did following my calling it out, he should have indicated somewhere.

    • Can you give a single example of any of these recent allegations of sexual abuse turning out to be false? I’ll be waiting.

      • I have a question, if you immediately believe the person pointing the finger: Why? Do you immediately find the person themselves credible, or do you merely find the accusation of sexual harassment attractive to jump behind and support?

        Why do you not personally believe in giving both people the chance to defend their points of view equally on such an event?

        • Ah why say I’m jumping on the bandwagon when you could just ask me if I think I am?

          ‘Just asking questions’ amirite? 😉

        • I know what you are saying and I agree with the sentiment, but to answer your question is not that it is “more attractive”, but rather that studies have proved time and again that an overwhelming percentage of rapists get away with, never being reported or with reports being thrown off for lack of sufficient evidence. (It needs to be mentioned here that unless a pregnancy comes as a result, most of the hard evidence for this kind of crime fades quickly after perpetration, within the days where the victim is more scared and in emotional pain.)

          Rape is invariably accompanied with terrible threats. When you compound that with the fact that there will ALWAYS be a significant percentage of the public ready not only to disbelieve you, but also to try to turn the tables on you as a “lying slut” or whatever, speaking up is an act of tremendous bravery, especially when you do so against those wealthy and powerful.

          All those things make me feel as though that if there’s good in your heart, your very first impulse needs to be to believe the victim. I understand that that makes one ripe for those who actually will take advantage of your compassion to falsely accuse someone. I am sure, however, that for each fake report there are dozens if not hundreds of real ones. I very much prefer to wrongly condemn innocent men a few times than to condemn a majority of real /victims/ in order to protect those hypothetical men–and I trust that a due legal process will clear the few innocent men.

          • The problem there becomes the false ideal that the innocent men then go on to lead normal lives. Shit thrown at a wall sticks, it leaves a stain permanently. You don’t have to be guilty to be labelled a rapist, you just need to be accused.

            I very much prefer to wrongly condemn innocent men a few times than to condemn a majority of real /victims/ in order to protect those hypothetical men

            Thankfully, everyone is entitled to due process in our society. However, at the moment the biggest enemy to due process and the actual justice towards rapists and having them sent to jail, is the actual victims choosing to come forward on social media unfortunately before doing anything else, which I do understand why they don’t go to the police most of the time, however it should be recognised that Social Media itself is mostly a harmful platform for their needs. Something does have to change of course, but trial by facebook in the end isn’t going to be the profound answer because it simply doesn’t bring about permanent, long lasting implications.

            When people come forward and pollute both evidence and society towards the accused before going to the authorities, the accused can often plead successfully they cannot gain an unbiased jury trial if it does go that far. While obviously not applicable to every case, we’ve seen a lot of them so far where it absolutely is. It’s going to be very interesting to see what emerges from all of these, but I don’t think either side will actually ‘win’ in the end, I fear it’s going to get very very messy for everyone unfortunately, and I fear a lot of people are going to end up with charges, and worse still, I don’t think they’ll be the accused.

            But the idea of condemning the innocent on a mere suspicion or thought to jail, this is a dangerous, horrendous way to think that opens up literally every facet of the law to abuse. You have an inkling of a feeling, or you think someone may, so you think they should be arrested and you ‘trust’ they’ll be cleared by law. What of those who aren’t and spend their lives behind bars, or worse, in countries where death penalties exist and their lives are potentially ended in countries where they do apply the death penalty for such actions? Sure, it’s an appeal to pathos and ethos, but it’s the logical extent of that question. Do we just say ‘aye that’s ok mate, you died for the cause’.

          • The problem there becomes the false ideal that the innocent men then go on to lead normal lives. Shit thrown at a wall sticks, it leaves a stain permanently. You don’t have to be guilty to be labelled a rapist, you just need to be accused.

            I am aware of this and it sucks, as it sucks for anybody who is the victim of a crime. However, as I said, for each innocent man unjustly accused, there are dozens of real perps who never, in other circumstances, would have been called out and may have gone to rape many more other women.

            So how do we put this in a balance? To protect a few men, would you silence hundreds of women who are already victims? Put in risk hundreds of others by allowing the rapists stay at large? I /know/ you are going to say, ‘no, what I want is due process, etc, etc’. It’s almost as though these silly women hadn’t thought of that before, right? The best, most efficient and fair solution is /just there/ and they insist in going to social media instead, tsk. Really, at this point it’s on their own heads that rape is still an issue!

            *sigh* Pardon the sarcasm. See, the problem is this: While I do not, for a moment doubt the purity of your intentions or the genuineness of your arguments, these are the very same arguments that I hear aaaaall day coming from people who very definitely are sexist, who harbour hatred for women and who downplay rape (and perhaps have partaken themselves). They are seemingly reasonable arguments presented under the veneer of concern for all these poor hypothetical men suffering a lifetime of unfair captivity (while, unfailingly, neglecting to express any concern for the thousands of real women victims of rape). However, never a real case is presented.

            Real rape is comparatively hardly ever prosecuted, so imagine the number of fake cases among them, which, going by the infrequent news around them, are thrown off in court, anyway. There’s no evidence suggesting that fake rape accusations are more prevalent (and/or successful) than, say, fake assault, robbery or harassment accusations–and yet, you don’t see anybody trying to shush people when they speak out about such crimes because “think of all the poor innocent people that you are enabling to be falsely accused!” On the other hand, rape is one of the crimes with a significantly higher percentage of unprosecuted cases and that’s going by those that are reported or suspected, which are calculated to be a fraction of the actual number.

            Something does have to change of course, but trial by facebook in the end isn’t going to be the profound answer because it simply doesn’t bring about permanent, long lasting implications.

            That seems like a really pessimistic (and unfounded) assessment, but let us say that for the sake of the argument I agree with you. Still, short-term, momentary implications are WAY more than what many of these rapists have ever experienced. Some of them, in fact, went to live, prosper and become “respected” pillars of their communities/industries and that’s precisely what has brought us here, to this social media circus: If women had been empowered to speak up and expose rapists since long ago, we wouldn’t all of a sudden get gut-punched by the torpedoing deluge of filth accumulated under pressure behind that plugged lid–which makes it look (using OP’s words) as though as “it’s getting out of hand”.

            I think one of the problems of people like you regarding this issue is that you believe that women report rape and assault in social media in order to obtain “a trial by Facebook”. But most don’t want that! Most of them understand what you mentioned about such “trials” being ineffective and insufficient. Such “trials” are an uncontrollable side effect, caused by genuine horror and disgust, but the reason they go to social media is to empower other women–who are also victims of the same person and have been scared (or scarred) into silence–to share their story. Then, and only then, they will have a better case to build against the perp than the one they’d get if they just quietly filed a report at a police station.

            It’s going to be very interesting to see what emerges from all of these, but I don’t think either side will actually ‘win’ in the end

            I’m glad that you find this little social experiment “interesting”. For some women–past, present, and future– is a matter of abominable pain, humiliation and self-loathing. Regardless, even if you believe that “no side will win”… well, taking into account that through the decades of existence of our modern legal system the rapists have been winning–by a landslide, I’m pretty sure that taking away that win from them would represent a win for many women.

            But the idea of condemning the innocent on a mere suspicion or thought to jail

            Where is this happening? Give me ONE example, please. Who has gone to jail (or melodramatically worse, on death row) directly following accusations on social media, skipping due process? C’mon, just the one. I’ll put on my side of the balance the millions and millions of women who get raped and I only ask of you one case, if that’s how you value the hypothetical suffering of a man against the real suffering of multitudes. I’ll accept it, ok? Just show me that all your concern has /any/ grounds at all.

          • Yeah, because I am attempting to defend the indefensible with inflated and seemingly polite rhetoric. How dare I speak in favour of that scum, raped women.

            On the other hand, you surely know that trying to deflect with a remark for the arguer or the form of their words arguer instead of responding to the arguments is a logical fallacy, right? 😉

          • No sealioning is bad-faith requests for evidence, or repeated questions, the purpose of which is not clarification or elucidation, but rather an attempt to derail a discussion. However now you’re strawmanning…

          • Hmm, then I don’t know where you got your definition of “sealioning” but that’s not the one I know. Regardless, you are assuming bad faith on my part. The repeated question was merely for emphasis and was literally the last bit of my post. You decided to ignore the whole rest of my post–where I actually presented the core arguments of my discussion–focused on misinterpreting the form of the last paragraph (perhaps to avoid having to admit that the evidence requested is non-existent?) and now accuse me of strawmanning for pointing out a logical fallacy on your part.

            It seems to me that you are doing your darnedest to “win” the discussion without actually providing a single relevant counterargument to the thing actually being discussed.

  • Came to see the usual chorus of dudes downplaying sexual assault, leaving with a ton of downvotes as they censor anyone who disagrees with them.

    You people do this EVERY SINGLE TIME. What goes off in your head that forces you to go ‘Hey, better go cast doubt on alleged victims of sexual assault to defend the rights of all these poor guys I think are being wrongly accused.’?

    Oh and to answer the same ‘questions’ you people vomit up each time:

    1) Sexual assault is a major issue. Victims don’t make accusations casually and easily.
    2) Sexual assault is a viciously traumatising issue. Victims don’t make accusations casually and easily.
    3) Sexual assault is routinely dealt with poorly by the police. Victims don’t make accusations casually and easily.
    4) Sexual assault is extremely hard to prove and extremely traumatic to pursue through courts. Victims don’t make accusations casually and easily.

    The ‘trial by social media’ you are all squawking about is used because IT IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN PROSECUTION because the system is set up to protect abusers.

    Don’t like it? Reduce the number of abusers.

    Don’t know how?

    Well start with the legion of middle class white dudes who rush to their keyboards every time the issue comes up to reinforce the status quo of protecting abusers.

    You’re why this happens so frequently.

    • I’m not asking this as a loaded question, but I’m wondering how the system is set up to protect abusers?

      Are you referring to burden of proof?

      • Of course. In most cases, sexual assault intentionally takes place where there are no witnesses. Therefore it’s ‘his word against hers’ and his wins.

        This is why it happens tens of millions of times a day, every day, all over the world.

        Because they know they will get away with it.

        And should the woman be able to leverage anything beyond that point, look at this page. Look at all the comments, as they are the same people, saying the same things, every single time.

        Nothing but men who INSTANTLY leap to the defence of an accused abuser. Every time. They don’t need ‘proof’ and in the instances when there’s plenty of evidence, they still do it.

        Unless you get an all female jury, good luck with that. Chances are you’re going to have it stacked with these foul people.

    • Exactly where did in most of the responses here say that we downplayed sexual assault and it say it wasnt serious?

      Assault allegations are always very serious claims hence why a lot of us here are against this whole method of trial by social media.. if the guy is scum then proper procedure needs to be followed so that he can be properly judged and punished and coversely to make sure the innocent do not suffer. Social media revelations just makes it easier for them to get together a defence and the very least get the trial thrown out because of lack of an unbiased panel and at worst an innocent suffers.

      Approaches like trial by social media helps no one as i said all it does is draw unnecessary lines on the sand and waters down the impact of every allegation afterwards as people start getting cynical about the next scandal of the day. You say the system supposdly protects the status quo? Then work on changing the system to make it fairer. Dont bypass it. And dont disregard the fact that whilst it is a flawed system its there to make sure you are also protected from being punished by the law if you are an innocent party.

      • Exactly where did in most of the responses here say that we downplayed sexual assault and it say it wasnt serious?

        Ah, the old strategy of demanding “when did we literally say that” when it’s your actions and the things that you don’t say that clearly betray your position. Whenever the topic of rape, abuse or harassment comes around, the responses that the poster describes start raining. They all will have a token “well yeah, that sucks and all” and then launch into a lengthy diatribe about the sanctity of the legal system and importance of never risking accusing an innocent man. Allow me to illustrate:

        if the guy is scum then proper procedure needs to be followed so that he can be properly judged and punished and coversely to make sure the innocent do not suffer.

        Whoa, a very generous “judged and punished if the guy is scum”, but let’s not lose sight of the importance of making sure that the innocent (men) do not suffer. Not that justice is served, that victims are compensated or allowed to reach closure, that rape stops being a systemic, almost epidemic issue. In order to ensure that innocent men are NEVER at risk of being unfairly accused, let’s champion a system that by every single possible metric studied has been so grossly inefficient that allowed the issue to worsen with the years. Let me ask you a question: what stopped a teen-molester from becoming a US Senator: the legal system or women reporting their testimony in social media?

  • I just hope that people actually start going to the police instead of instituting Trial by Social Media, if for no other reason than it could prejudice a jury (to the delight of any competent defense attorney).

Show more comments

Comments are closed.

Log in to comment on this story!